Sunday, September 14, 2008

IT WAS NEVER OUR BUSINESS


I had wanted to write something about what was going on over at the "Penny Mumu" blog but this comment came through and said it far better than I could have. This is a comment submitted by Fanny.

"I had to laugh at the comment about "Guin/nomoredrama/anya/amy and their minions..." lol I haven't commented there because I don't have a google/eblogger account and haven't gotten around to setting one up yet, but I think every point I'd have made has already been made, and ignored or twisted beyond recognition.

Someone commented on how we like to go to other boards that don't share our opinions and start fights. First of all, from what I saw no one here did anything but make perfectly rational points and answered (loaded) questions from pm, some of which didn't make any sense to begin with.

Secondly,I have seen gwop attack any and every blog they could find with an opposing opinion. I haven't seen anyone here do that. The difference is, PM's blog is not just opinion, according to her, she is posting fact. I think there is a big difference.

As for Julie, I think she should just stop talking. I didn't think much of her before just based on her affiliation with gwop, and after reading her entries on pm's blog, my opinion of her has only gotten worse.

She accused the regulars here who dared to question gwop of reading too much into the comments and making a big deal over nothing. HELLOOOOO??? Does she read that blog, EVER??? Of course she does. She seemed to be fully aware of and ready to defend some of the most questionable comments from gwop about the children. WTF? She goes on to say that there is more information that is "none of your business" and that she isn't trying to convince anyone. I fail to see the distinction between anything she's already said, and any other info she may have. IT WAS NEVER OUR BUSINESS. This should have been handled inside the family. She is the one who brought all of the torch-wielding strangers into it. As far as not trying to convince anyone, why is she still talking? If the new info is not our business, what else could she possible have to say?

I also think it was awfully nice of her to half way accept nomoredrama's apology on the condition that all of the anti-jodi/julie posts here be removed. As far as I'm concerned, she proved every anti-julie point that has been posted here in her comments on pm's blog. As for Jodi, I hope she just doesn't know what her sister is supporting."

54 comments:

mamma said...

As far as hoping that Jodi doesn't know what Julie is up with all these posts ... no way! IMO, she knows all too well. All too well.

delurkerloo said...

I moved this comment because it was more appropriate here. Nina Bell


delurkerloo has left a new comment on your post "OPEN DISCUSSION -":

Hey, all. After the debacle that was my first time ever posting on a blog yesterday I swore to myself I wouldn't do it anymore, but I think it's much more sane and pleasant over here so I'll give it a go.

I posted one last comment at the PM blog, but I doubt it will be published.

I basically told Julie to call CPS if Jon and Kate were abusing the kids. I based this on her response to seeing the awful comments at GWOP. She said she wasn't phased by it so much because Jon and Kate have said these kinds of things directly to the kids. She said in so many words that the children were being emotionally abused beyond t.v. exploitation.

I found this even more disturbing than her blowing off the Joel = Sybil comments by a mod at GWOP (BTW, how many freakin times did I have to point out that iluveeyore is a mod there and have that little fact conveniently ignored).

Who really knows, though, if Julie is telling the truth. All I know is if there is a case for abuse she better do something besides comment on blogs about anything other than said abuse.

Here's where Julie's story gets sticky - Reports of child abuse are taken seriously. It's a whole different ballgame from reporting a crime. The parents are innocent until proven guilty. I find it hard to believe that J&K +8 would still be on the air if there was a valid case of abuse against them. Even the hint of official accusation would kill the show and TLC wouldn't support them through that because for TLC it's all about the dough.

Things in Julie's story just aren't adding up. She went from posting a blog about "gumgate" and contracts to child exploitation to serious emotional abuse. I have come to the conclusion that she doesn't know jack.

I'm still going to give Jodi the benefit of the doubt. I respect that she defended her sister and then immediately went back to living her life in private. I have a feeling Jodi is being pulled in a lot of different directions by strong willed family members and is just struggling to get through it. I feel badly for anyone in that kind of situation. A lot of us have been there.

Anonymous said...

Nothing like a healthy dose of plagiarism to make your website sing with disreputability!

Nina Bell said...

Anon 9:26 am

Not sure what you are referring to. This comment was submitted to our site so therefore belongs to this site.

Fanny said...

Anon, I submitted this comment and I can assure you that I did not post it anywhere else nor did I "plagiarize" anything. Please elaborate...

Mom said...

I was surprised to see the comment about "accepting" NMD's apology. To me that's just another sign of lost credibility. It wasn't nice. I think NMD's comment was heartfelt and it would have been better for Julie to not say anything at all.

When I have time away from my real life, I'll go back and re-read the posts she wants removed and offer my two cents on that. My guess is alot of any negative comments were made by "anon" poster, but I'm just speculating.

We'll see. Thanks for your post Miss Fanny! :-)

Linda said...

It is interesting ... (someone wrote this "over there")

that Julie calls this site a "hate" site because there are some statements here that offend her and her sister, but the offensive comments about the KIDS ...thats children... are things that people are taking too seriously or out of context.

Maybe Jodi cares about those kids, but her ambivalent attitude about this makes me believe that she doesn't really.

Linda said...

Btw - the last line should have read ...

Maybe Jodi cares about those kids, but JULIE's ambivalent attitude about this makes me believe that she doesn't really.

Anonymous said...

It is my opinion that J&K using their kids to support the lifestyle they want is reprehensible, and just because it is allowable about law doesn't make it right.

There are alot of things that people could see/hear that they think crosses the line of acceptable parent behavior, but again, are techinically allowable by law. That doesn't make the things the parents do right or appropriate.

"I basically told Julie to call CPS if Jon and Kate were abusing the kids. I based this on her response to seeing the awful comments at GWOP. She said she wasn't phased by it so much because Jon and Kate have said these kinds of things directly to the kids." Do you honestly think that once J&K breaks the law, there will not be a phone call to CPS? But again, just because they haven't crossed that line yet doesn't mean their behavior is justified.

"She said in so many words that the children were being emotionally abused beyond t.v. exploitation."

This is your interpretation of what she said. I took it to mean that we have not seen Kate and Jon's worse behavior towards the kids. Does that translate into being labled "emotionally abused" under CPS classification? No, because she would have called if it did. But again, it doesn't mean what J&K do is right.

J&K will not stop this train wreck that is funding their lifestyle. That is why every season the number of shows they do for TLC increases. So since Julie and Jodi CAN'T call CPS because according to CPS guidelines J&K techinically haven't done anything wrong, Julie is trying to stop the train wreck by making things that happen behind the scenes on the TV show public.

Maybe, just maybe, if enough people complain, this train wreck will finally be stopped.

saintsfan said...

So did anyone notice that GWoP now has a site called the Duggars without Pity. That is ashame! They are so thrilled about it too. It's pretty pathetic that they're sinking to that level.

I was posting at PM's blog as well. I thought is was very amusing that Julie can talk bad about other people all day, but when someone has something bad to say about her she gets so defensive. She thinks nomoredrama should delete the posts made about her, but I think that should happen the day she takes down all of her posts about the Gosselins....which will be never! I also got amused when they accused Amy of being a PR person from Figure 8 Films. If we take up for Kate we're either a PR person, Kate herself, sheeple, "in the business of exploiting children," or we must be mean spirited. How about how people praise Julie and PM for being so "brave?" I think of a word that starts with a "B" when I think of those two and it sure as heck isn't brave!

I finally got a google name, I usually post here as anna.

amy said...

i, too, feel that julie's "mission" has been redirected into "saving the children" from various sorts of abuse! maybe i missed something, but i don't believe that was her "beef" when this began...but, of course, jump on that band wagon julie (or as my husband would say, go ahead and be the driver).

i also find it appauling that julie would choose to think that some pick GWOP apart for their comments, but ask NMD to remove certain comments about her or jodi...WTF???

the outpouring of gratitude and thanks for julie and PM for coming out with the "truth" is sickening IMO.

when i saw that julie said she was done answering questions b/c ppl can't ask for more and more, but yet tell her to stop "airing dirty laundry" (can't have it both ways)...i left a comment immediately and told her THANKYOU for stopping and i would only hope PM would do the same, but PM took it down.

i'm not an avid J&K supporter, but i find these blogs to be utterly distasteful. i was never hateful on PM's blog. but, how is it that so many like myself were accused of being kate wannabes, or working for F8...and then told were being childish and that we must be FOR child exploitation!!! b/c i don't agree with a blog where a public family is dragged through the mud (while others revel in it), i'm FOR child exploitation! boggles my mind. i guess this is what they have to resort to.

it's not worth my time to argue with ppl that are so parochial that you can't have a reasonable discussion with them. it's all or nothing, you hate them or you idolize them...is there a middle ground? PM seems to promote the middle ground, but that doesn't come out in her responses IMO...

MommyZinger said...

Personally, I think it was juvenile and cowardly of Julie to go to PM's site instead of defending herself here. And is she forgetting that she has HER OWN BLOG! If she had an issue with what was being said of her here then she should have participated in the topic or entered a post on her own space.

amy said...

i know, mommyzinger, i've been wondering why julie is "blog bouncing"??? go to YOUR blog that you are so proud of and stay there. she's loving all of this attention and has made it her life!

Anonymous said...

She thinks nomoredrama should delete the posts made about her, but I think that should happen the day she takes down all of her posts about the Gosselins....which will be never!

Wouldn't the difference be that Julie knows the Gosselins personally and writes about her experiences, while everyone here doen't know Julie, and is just assuming things about her based on the select information she gives out?

HBIC8u said...

I'm guessing the Duggar blog is an attempt at proving that they are doing it for the kids. Blogs all over have been basically daring them to start dwop since they announced there would be a weekly series. It's funny, actually. I doubt they could find enough people who hate ma and pa duggar enough to produce the kind of crap that has become synonymous with gwop.


Anon, I respectfully disagree. I don't think Julie is trying to stop the "train wreck", I think she's only perpetuating it. I'm not sure what her motives are, but they don't seem, to me anyway, to be as pure as she would like us to think. I had given her a pass, thinking she might not have been aware of all of the distasteful comments about the gosselins and their children on gwop, but now that she's responded by defending those comments, I've lost all respect for her(not that I had much to begin with).

Not that she cares what I think. For everyone who thinks like me, there is someone at gwop telling her how brave and noble she is for "speaking out". I will never understand how blabbing your family's problems all over the internet is noble.

Anonymous said...

Actually, according to the ToS at Blogger, each person, it seems, still retains the rights to their work, regardless if it is submitted to a specific blog- as it should be.

"You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any Content you submit, post or display on or through Google services and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate."

A blog is not a third party licensor, so the only way this blog could own any of the work is if the admins of the blog hosted it themselves and had a notice that stated "by submitting to this site...blah blah).

According to Title 17 of US Copyright law, anyone who authors intellectual property owns it unless clear and explicit rights have been sold or relinquished. Copyright ownership can further be enhanced by registering work with the copyright office, which most people on blogs don't bother to do.

Additionally, according to the ToS at Blogger, by anyone submitting to this site, they relinquist certain rights to Google (not blog owners) and allow Google others. http://www.blogger.com/terms.g

"By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through Google services which are intended to be available to the members of the public, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, publish and distribute such Content on Google services for the purpose of displaying and distributing Google services. Google furthermore reserves the right to refuse to accept, post, display or transmit any Content in its sole discretion."

Nina Bell said...

So really anon 6:46 pm, what is your point? You still haven't made it.

HBIC8u said...

Anon, I'm not convinced that the info she's handing out is actually "select". If I had to bet I'd say she's probably not holding anything back. And if she is, for what purpose? Because it wouldn't be ethical?lol

As far as making assumptions based on her comments, most of them are pretty straight forward.


BTW, Fanny got a blogger acct!

Anonymous said...

I've made my point. You're plagiarizers- ie. law breakers. If I had done that, I'd want to know. Obviously you don't or you just don't understand the law. It doesn't really help your reputability. Que sera, sera. Not going to beat a dead horse about it. Your blog, your responsibility.

Have a great night.

Nina Bell said...

So all of the posters over at GWoP that lifted stuff from the new Gosselins site??? What would you call that site? GWoP participated.

Anonymous said...

Anon, I'm not convinced that the info she's handing out is actually "select". If I had to bet I'd say she's probably not holding anything back. And if she is, for what purpose? Because it wouldn't be ethical?lol

And how have you come to this conclusion about someone you don't personally know? (You don't have to answer - it's a rhetorical question.) You have no facts for the basis of your conclusion, only your assumations.

nomoredrama said...

Whoever you are...stop hiding behind an anonymous s/n so you can say "I've never posted there"

So annoying....

nomoredrama said...

And plagiarism is the act of taking someone's work and passing it off as your own. So there is no plagiarism going on. We'd never take credit for that horrid stuff.

Mom said...

Nina said "it belongs here," not that she owned it.

Fanny wrote it, unless someone can prove otherwise. So she owns it.

Quoting the Google babble about intellectual property rights makes absolutely no sense if you are going to accuse someone of copying someone's work and saying it is their own - which was not the case here.

Step up to the plate or be on your merry way.

HBIC8u said...

Well, she has openly discussed the Gosselin's finances, their relationships(or lack there of) with family and friends, the horrible way they treat their children...etc. I guess I just don't see how or why anything else would be off limits. She has basically discussed a second account(Jodi's) of this family's life with total strangers on the internet, most of which frequently post on a blog that clearly hates Kate and from what I've seen, aren't too fond of her children either. It seems odd to me that someone would pick and choose on which days and which subjects to be unethical.

HBIC8u said...

Oh, and I dunno wtf you are talking about anon, but if I were going to plagiarize something, I'd have come up with something way better than that...lol

Gimme a link or something to prove that you aren't as pathetic as you are making yourself out to be.

madalainef said...

Anon has a point. You reproduced Fanny's work electronically without her permission and didn't site it properly- that IS plagiarism. ("I hope this is ok with her.")

By doing so, you infringed on her intellectual property rights under copyright law. The Google information only serves to back this up. I have to agree with Anon on this one.

However, the chances of Fanny turning you in or the chances of you getting caught are slim.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps this person worried about plagiarism would feel better if people used direct quotes to give credit where credit is due? However, it seems that if we mention "that other place" they get up in arms - which is it? Direct quote, or not?

Linda said...

hbic8u -

I think that today, I could be your "head writer" on your blog. ha ha!

==================

Ignore anon. It is a diversion ...

=================

Personally, I can't get the image of Julie's little smirk when Jodi called her in front of the web camera out of my mind whenever I read anything she posts.

I can just envision her saying, "Gotcha!"

I didn't have much respect for her in posting the information on the blog.

I think it was NMD who said what I thought. In the Gumgate episode, the person who K made look bad was K. IMO, K seemed out of control and over the top.

By revealing all of this other stuff, Julie made Jodi and herself look bad.

By Julie being ambivalent about the stuff posted about the kids but deeply offended about the things posted about her just makes me shake my head.

Pathetic.

anya said...

Amy said...

i'm not an avid J&K supporter, but i find these blogs to be utterly distasteful. i was never hateful on PM's blog. but, how is it that so many like myself were accused of being kate wannabes, or working for F8...and then told were being childish and that we must be FOR child exploitation!!! b/c i don't agree with a blog where a public family is dragged through the mud (while others revel in it), i'm FOR child exploitation!


Amy, I just wanted you to know I shook my head when YOU were included with some of us others as being part of the hateful minions who were terrorizing PM's site. WTF? Unless I missed a post of yours, I didn't see you post anything offensive. Yes, you offered a different opinion than the majority, but the first nastiness I saw in the postings you were involved in came when a poster accused you of being an employee of Figure 8. That's mature and respectful debate isn't it?!

I am sick to death of Gosselin detractors who label those of us who disagree with them as being in favor of child exploitation. This is nothing more than a straw man argument designed to draw the conversation away from the actual areas of disagreement.

anya said...

HBIC8u said...
"Blogs all over have been basically daring them to start dwop since they announced there would be a weekly series. synonymous with gwop."


Lordy be, a weekly Duggar series? I think that's one reality program I will be able to stay away from!


"Anon, I respectfully disagree. I don't think Julie is trying to stop the "train wreck", I think she's only perpetuating it. I'm not sure what her motives are, but they don't seem, to me anyway, to be as pure as she would like us to think. I had given her a pass, thinking she might not have been aware of all of the distasteful comments about the gosselins and their children on gwop, but now that she's responded by defending those comments, I've lost all respect for her(not that I had much to begin with)."

I agree. My jaw dropped when she came on PM's site and basically wrote off the malicious commments on GWoP as much ado about nothing. Wow. I mean wow! How much do you have to HATE these non-relatives of yours to condone the comments that Delurkerloo brought over? And these were not even the "worst of the worst." Unbelievable.

Nina Bell said...

madalainef
"Anon has a point. You reproduced Fanny's work electronically without her permission and didn't site it properly- that IS plagiarism. ("I hope this is ok with her.")

By doing so, you infringed on her intellectual property rights under copyright law. The Google information only serves to back this up. I have to agree with Anon on this one.

However, the chances of Fanny turning you in or the chances of you getting caught are slim."


What are you talking about? It clearly says in red at the top of the page who wrote it and it is in quotes. It was also posted to this blog and I can place it wherever I please. She sumbitted it here, to this blog.

nomoredrama said...

Fanny's obviously pissed that her comment was made a main post. Or not.

You're attempt to stir up trouble failed. Go play somewhere else. Or at least try to come up with a more interesting thing to argue about. I'm falling asleep listening to all of this.

anya said...

delurkerloo said...
"Hey, all. After the debacle that was my first time ever posting on a blog yesterday I swore to myself I wouldn't do it anymore, but I think it's much more sane and pleasant over here so I'll give it a go."


Hi Delurkerloo, welcome! I want to thank you and publically acknowledge you for the time and effort I am sure it took to cut and paste those DEPRAVED comments from GWoP. It's not like I relished seeing them again, but for what it's worth, you provided black and white evidence that they are not the snow white child advocates they pretend to be. And you put it all out there for Julie to see. And what does this righteous "brave" woman do? She defends the comments! I lack the vocabulary to adequately describe how distasteful I feel her actions and words have been. And I don't care if she is telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the events surrounding Jodi's departure from the show. Nothing, nothing can convince me that her actions have been honorable.

"I found this even more disturbing than her blowing off the Joel = Sybil comments by a mod at GWOP (BTW, how many freakin times did I have to point out that iluveeyore is a mod there and have that little fact conveniently ignored)."

Yes, very sad. It's truly "anything goes" in the name of "child advocacy." Ah, to be so sure that you are "right". Therein lies madness.

Anonymous said...

I'm still wondering if this isn't just some stunt that got out of hand.

Jodi,Julie and Kate could have set out to "play" with the haters!

Anyone expectinga "reconsiliation" on camara soon? :)

delurkerloo said...

I took a look at the Duggars Without Pity site. I only read a few comments, but most of them are defending the Duggars in comparison to the Gosselins. You can already see what's going to happen. DWOP is going to be nothing more than GWOP part 2. The only difference being the direct comparison and constant examples of why the Gosselins are worse than the Duggars. ThreeFarmers is there. Seems that ThreeFarmers is everywhere.

Fanny said...

Nomoredrama, that is NOT me. I finally set up a blogger account (hbic8u)yesterday and have been using it. I commented earlier in the day as "Fanny" when anon made her first entry about plagiarism. I don't care that it was used. I posted it here for people to see, in the comment section or wherever any of you wanted to put it. I thought Anon was accusing ME of plagiarism.

I post here often and I am NOT a child. If I had a problem with it I would have emailed Nina bell.

Saint said...

Hello...first time here.
I hope my comment gets through.

I agree that private things such as family squabbles should not be aired in public. I believe the real fault lies with the people who live their private moments on TV.

If someone has a TV show that I agree to be on, and then, when I watch the program later, I find that, through the editing process, I am portrayed as too dim to figure out how to handle three year-olds, I'd be pretty hurt. I would probably talk to the people involved, talk to my sisters and parents, ask my friends what to do.

If, in response to this, my feelings were ignored, my hurt feeling would definitely turn to anger. How could I refute the unfair public portrayal? I don't have my own TV show...

I think that this spilled onto the Internet because only the Gosselins had control of how their extended family was portrayed. And they weren't careful to be nice about it.

I agree with almost everyone who posts here that family laundry aired in public is unseemly. But how can anyone who has another side to the story have their side told? Once it's been aired on TV, it is no longer a private family matter anymore.

nomoredrama said...

Fanny, I was being sarcastic to the others. When I said "Fanny is pissed" I meant the exact opposite. Sometimes that doesn't come across correctly.

I knew you didn't care. My point was that I think people are trying to stir up trouble here at any cost.

nomoredrama said...

Saint,
I think that 90% of the population who watched the show never viewed Jodi as a ditz. Gumgate was a bad Kate moment. I think many of us were uncomfortable watching this and feeling bad for Jodi.

The only reason that there is any backlash now for Jodi is because of Julie's blogging. There was no need to 'defend' against this one, IMO. The audience saw it for what it was.

HBIC8u(formerly Fanny) said...

nomoredrama said...

"Fanny, I was being sarcastic to the others. When I said "Fanny is pissed" I meant the exact opposite. Sometimes that doesn't come across correctly.

I knew you didn't care. My point was that I think people are trying to stir up trouble here at any cost."



Oh..lol..sorry 'bout that. Like I said, I thought she was accusing me so maybe I was just on the defensive. My bad:-)

MCB said...

Oh brother. It's the latest wave of bullspit from the GWoPPERS. They get an idea (such as coming over here en masse to say "Why are you so obsessed with GWoP?"). When that didn't have the desired affect, they had to come up with a new plan. "Hey, lets accuse them of plagiarizing off one of their own posters." Lame.

Speaking of lame, there's Julie and her incredibly hypocritical attempt to bully/censor this blog. "I'll accept your apology only if you take down the bad stuff you posted about me and Jodi." Personally, I don't think her forgiveness is worth it. Julie opened herself up to criticism by aligning herself with a controversial hate site such as GWoP. Jodi backed her up on video. What's the old saying about lying down with dogs?

Road2Madness said...

Isn't it funny that anon complained about "plagarism" in this website (what plagarism? I am not seeing it) whereas P-Mommy put Anya's comment made in this website on her website for all to see? OMG....plagarism! ;)

*chuckles*

twinmom said...

I don't give a darn what Julie wants. No apology from me Julie! You crossed the line by setting up your blog and spilling family information. Now deal with the backlash.

As for the gumgate episode. Oh, yeah! Kate was wrong-big time! But I don't see how that was enough to send Julie into blogmania. Most likely? It was a money issue or some other family quarrel. I don't know, I don't care. If you set yourself up on the internet, then you have to be ready to take the heat that comes with it. As far as this blog is concerned, this is the least of Julie's problems. The women who post here regularly are pretty honest and are not cheerleaders for the Gosselins nor are they haters of the Gosselins. There is this thing called discernment and insight and I think the original owners of this blog as well as the original posters are discerning people who see through the producer's set ups and see inappropriate behaviors and statements from the Gosselin parents and are very willing to admit that without trashing these people about their rear ends, stomachs, nice hair do, bigger house, and on and on and on. It's amazing to me that a POSITIVE point of view that allows for appropriate discourse has people pitching a fit! I guess a mirror does exactly what it was meant to do: you can't run from it and say it isn't there when the mirror reflects back the ugliness that is being displayed in front of it.

All that said, I'm looking forward to this episode tonight. I have some fun memories of taking our sons to the circus and it seems so long ago!

anya said...

Road2Madness said...
"Isn't it funny that anon complained about "plagarism" in this website (what plagarism? I am not seeing it) whereas P-Mommy put Anya's comment made in this website on her website for all to see? OMG....plagarism! ;)"


Thanks, Road2Madness. I didn't know I was even mentioned until I saw it here!

For what's it worth, my comment was taken out of context. P-Mommy seems to feel I was miffed that comments weren't being posted fast enough? GDNNOP is my Gosselin blog 'home', I have posted on P-Mommy occasionally, but truly I am not refreshing my screen every 5 seconds to see if my post is up yet! I know it will be ignored by the vast majority anyway because "I am on the wrong side."

My post was simply questioning what her intentions were because things were getting kind of heated over there and I hadn't seen her post in more than a day.

Oh well. I guess it's best to stick closer to home! Thank god for GDNNOP!

Anonymous said...

when i saw that julie said she was done answering questions b/c ppl can't ask for more and more, but yet tell her to stop "airing dirty laundry" (can't have it both ways)...i left a comment immediately and told her THANKYOU for stopping and i would only hope PM would do the same, but PM took it down

AMBULL-I thought PM took down a post where Julie said the kids were in DANGER???? Does anyone have a copy of that post...because she is backtracking.

delurkerloo said...

I couldn't find the original statement about danger, but Julie addressed the issue again when Fiona questioned her about it:

The Truth Will Set You Free said...
Fiona,

This is what I said:

I find the situation dangerous for the children. I'm thankful that Paul Petersen is now involved. It has been proven over time that parents of child actors can't be trusted to make sound decisions when it comes to finances or what's best for the child. That's why laws have been made. All children in reality TV deserve the same protection.

HBIC8u said...

Was that the original post? I could have sworn she said something about the children being "abused".

Anonymous said...

Yes, I remember a different post because didn't Nomoredrama say something about calling CPS if she felt that way?

nomoredrama said...

Yes, it was a different post. She said this

I know you don't want to hear this, but maybe the comments on GWoP don't bother me because they are tame compared to what the children are living EVERY DAY. One of the reasons I stopped watching the show is because I couldn't stand watching the treatment of the children BY THEIR OWN PARENTS.

Maybe you should stop picking apart every word that is posted on GWoP and really listen to what is being said on the show. There would be many more examples of inappropriate, hurtful things being said directly to the children than there are posted on GWoP.

I know people are driving by Jodi's house. She has been approached when she was out for a walk.

And if Benny were treated the way Joel is, Jodi and I would be having a serious chat.


Which is why I responded the way I did. If she was implying that their parents say worse things to them then calling them serial killers and crazy (by diagnosing them the host of disorders they are diagnosed with daily by the child advocacy "experts") then that is emotional abuse.

That was my thinking but I never got to respond after Julie flew off the handle.

delurkerloo said...

I can't get over how she defends GWOP by basically saying Jon and Kate do the same thing. Even if they do, why would that make it acceptable for anyone else to say those things? I posted those quotes mostly for Julie's benefit since PM had such a free for all going on and I knew finally I could get through. I thought just maybe she wasn't fully aware of the kind of company she was keeping. I would have had more respect for her if she had denied that those things were ever said at GWOP and questioned the source. Instead she excused it all without even saying "well, maybe this or that went a little too far." That's when she showed her true colors - to me anyway.

Daisy said...

I completely agree delurkerloo. I was giving Julie and Jodi the benefit of the doubt until I read her response. It's just plain sad IMO.

Anonymous said...

I think the original post with the danger warning has been DELETED, probably per Julie!

Can someone find it and post it here..she needs to be called out on that!

nomoredrama said...

If it was deleted, I don't know how it could be found. It's gone, unless someone has copied it onto another blog.

I didn't see her directly accuse J &K of abuse. I only inferred.